From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id wBaEJ7SB12XE0wAAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 18:17:40 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id wBaEJ7SB12XE0wAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 18:17:40 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r24 header.b=ZrTxHbli; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1708622012; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=bLd3BwYXS6yOZhLhZP03v7BtMPK89w8zxmR1WJCws7Q=; b=pQOzdr+WUk/gFgV1QYhL9mA/AyUqjeBnZYz2eCXj/jy/VAOi7ljS1SPaJxHuJnrlqnB+Pc CxCO/PV0PHQh+T9twXDwJWCCF+6POUUolsqYUqQfTjMWq1AZ5Bpvc71Cpg60y7q/4371h1 5wGvI259njruy6MwmNBSB16Qh7mbndZeVCh7Bt2nCuYrOwlePh5kDJFi7dCD7XtuwZ5oMG H7gPP6Mw9JYdlTpMoDKWdGNgLeXrRt1wKXgi+FQLEA0+cHZv4xf1de8v01ZPy590M/8sby ntjZOc/1DyxtwQlfzYU5g9GSVSsn5RlafZtQy7Pxukvlner+v9HkTdsX+V6wIg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r24 header.b=ZrTxHbli; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1708622012; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=JzLLvZF61ddzbDYp0CJJTozg5gBwaPoK7pTa/gFsttDyN5k/2GG5O3q2SMWXHslAiBXJM+ 4nGht3dj8BmwYlK+z6fcz2e/NmWTsWmAj8tRH9K3wFj8+EM/d3eBbhce5u7DRwbUa7nZDS 6XZ+AXEjc/RjkUuNq+y7Y8fHaJ5kP5mKL62Khc1cgrV8rnBeNPS2P6WpugOrBw3xdvXfVM LGRtqYpZPV+qn9/oYqVZJkbHpJdvjVPPG7yhrc8uPiaPLIh5gEJBYwyeBjCxGZtK9HcVk3 8+00kSp0EDIA6Y/ktrMj68WU33YMQE5lFP4RDWu1ByXJCuWcF8XEYGMRMQ0tCw== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70FE3695D2 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 18:13:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rdCcx-0004Nj-Fh; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 12:12:55 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rdCcv-0004NU-KB for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 12:12:53 -0500 Received: from xavier.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:120:4::f00:14]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rdCcs-0000Mm-5D for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 12:12:52 -0500 Received: from [IPv6:2a02:1808:81:7064:b8e9:ae87:8763:bb2a] ([IPv6:2a02:1808:81:7064:b8e9:ae87:8763:bb2a]) by xavier.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id qHCi2B00S2XykBf01HClkd; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 18:12:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20240222181245.qHCi2B00S2XykBf01HClkd@xavier.telenet-ops.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andreas Enge Cc: Steve George , "guix-devel@gnu.org" , r0man , Reilly Siegel From: Maxime Devos Subject: RE: Proposal to turn off AOT in clojure-build-system Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 18:12:45 +0100 Importance: normal X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: References: <20240219154444.p2kj2B0094wMGJ4012kk71@baptiste.telenet-ops.be> <20240222155741.qExg2B0021q4WC401Exg6J@andre.telenet-ops.be> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_937D9825-63DB-4494-B770-2A69325D915F_" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=telenet.be; s=r24; t=1708621965; bh=pcl7GbdkEH3FZhhrjUJIsBvuh3qrVlFNibRgDuihTsc=; h=To:Cc:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=ZrTxHblidrZ7nExDnRp0HqAh+mVN1SD72kDbr/i2857w0LDMo0f112b5xQhEzlP+O RE9Fdqznbc0rubDf31Ql3TkrkAf7xAncxBSnhZCHl4WPoY0gIaSShkkKvX4a3Tr1u8 dMdrlBPLLeY/n3xd7LIwOCKlvxi9Gtu7j8wlrzJ9EkfD/7ubs0VRjUSRSaXn2Ylp5p GP4k1AKUZg4stzwSV6Qxz5ezs+yGqRGKnbZNp0hpInt7OT5+l+zxg29dLtQWC2DZX2 gK/WJwSeiFxgLM3StiicopUSoWGgy+GL9towPhZw5xHZ864l7qhkCNq2M/scNlEnY0 w3uyWt8W1pxkw== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:120:4::f00:14; envelope-from=maximedevos@telenet.be; helo=xavier.telenet-ops.be X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -9.64 X-Spam-Score: -9.64 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 70FE3695D2 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx11.migadu.com X-TUID: CIOl6zUOqihn --_937D9825-63DB-4494-B770-2A69325D915F_ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >Am Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 03:57:41PM +0100 schrieb Maxime Devos: >> Yes. It appears you are unfamiliar with (...) >> It also appears you are unfamiliar with (...) >May I suggest to not make assumptions about what other people are familiar with or not? There is no point in claiming that others are less knowledge- able than you; they may know as much or even more than you, and still come to different conclusions. (And even if people were unfamiliar with something, I would object to this haughty tone and suggest a more pleasant way of making suggestions.) This is hypocritical, you are (somewhat implicitly) making assumptions on m= y (un)familiarity with good manners and (somewhat implicitly) claiming that= I am less knowledges than you on good manners. Furthermore, you aren=E2=80= =99t actually suggesting a more pleasant to formulate the message of the pa= rt you quoted. Also, I did not simply _assume_ that Steve was unfamiliar with transformati= on, I _concluded_ that Steve was likely unfamiliar by what they didn=E2=80= =99t mention in their e-mails. Furthermore, the mere =E2=80=9Clikelihood=E2= =80=9D is included in the paragraph you quoted as part of the word =E2=80= =9Cappears=E2=80=9D =E2=80=93 I did not claim that Steve is unfamiliar, I o= nly claimed that it appeared to be the case, which is not the same thing.=20 After all, perhaps Steve does know that such transformation exist but perso= nally concluded them to not be a proper solution for some reason. In that c= ase, now people know there is a disagreement on the role of transformations= w.r.t. AOT and perhaps the source of the disagreement can be resolved, fur= thering knowledge and bring us closer to deciding on what the proper AOT de= fault would be. You mention that other people might know more, but there is also a flipside= to this =E2=80=93 sometimes people know _less_. In this case, perhaps Stev= e simply did not know about transformations and the proposed use of transfo= rmations in combination with enabling AOT by default would be agreeable to = Steve and as such perhaps an answer to the decision whether to enable AOT b= y default. As such, simply _assuming_ that Steve knew of transformations would be wron= g, so I had to mention the option of transformations. I did not simply claim that Steve is less knowledgable than me, at most it = could be said that I (implicitly) claimed that Steve is less knowledged tha= n me on the relation between transformations and Clojure AOT problems, but = even then, I included a qualifier =E2=80=9CIt appears that=E2=80=9D, not = =E2=80=9CIt is the case that=E2=80=9D. The beginning =E2=80=9CIt appears you are unfamiliar with [...]=E2=80=9D is= simply a perfectly cromulent beginning of a sentence, not some assertion o= f superiority. >For instance concerning the topic at hand, knowing that users may transfor= m packages as they wish to me seems to be independent of which default choice we should make for the distribution. It is not independent, see my previous e-mail where I explained how the exi= stence of transformations turns some problems mentioned w.r.t. enabling AOT= into non-problems. If you have a disagreement with that explanation, please actually say what = the disagreement is instead of only saying that you disagree. The former mi= ght bring us closer to some collective decision on what the proper default = behaviour is for Guix, the latter doesn=E2=80=99t, is almost useless and ma= kes it look like you didn=E2=80=99t bother to read the =E2=80=98(...)=E2=80= =99 part. While I suppose it is technically possible you have read the part =E2=80=98= (...)=E2=80=99, given your response I simply don=E2=80=99t believe you did = and hence I consider it fair to conclude that you are not familiar with the= contents of the (...) part. Best regards, Maxime Devos --_937D9825-63DB-4494-B770-2A69325D915F_ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"

>A= m Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 03:57:41PM +0100 schrieb Maxime Devos:

>> Yes. It appears you are unfamiliar with (...)

>> It also appears you are unfamiliar with (...)

=

 

>May I su= ggest to not make assumptions about what other people are familiar

with or not? There is no point in claiming that others are = less knowledge-

able than you; they may know as muc= h or even more than you, and still come

to differen= t conclusions. (And even if people were unfamiliar with

something, I would object to this haughty tone and suggest a more plea= sant

way of making suggestions.)

 

This is hypocritical, you a= re (somewhat implicitly) making assumptions on my (un)familiarity with good= manners and (somewhat implicitly) claiming that I am less knowledges than = you on good manners. Furthermore, you aren=E2=80=99t actually suggesting a = more pleasant to formulate the message of the part you quoted.

 

Also, I did not simp= ly _assume_ that Steve was unfamiliar with transformation, I _con= cluded_ that Steve was likely unfamiliar by what they didn=E2=80=99t me= ntion in their e-mails. Furthermore, the mere =E2=80=9Clikelihood=E2=80=9D = is included in the paragraph you quoted as part of the word =E2=80=9Cappear= s=E2=80=9D =E2=80=93 I did not claim that Steve is unfamiliar, I only claim= ed that it appeared to be the case, which is not the same thing.

 

After all, perhaps= Steve does know that such transformation exist but personally concluded th= em to not be a proper solution for some reason. In that case, now people kn= ow there is a disagreement on the role of transformations w.r.t. AOT and pe= rhaps the source of the disagreement can be resolved, furthering knowledge = and bring us closer to deciding on what the proper AOT default would be.

 

You mention= that other people might know more, but there is also a flipside to this = =E2=80=93 sometimes people know _less_. In this case, perhaps Steve = simply did not know about transformations and the proposed use of transform= ations in combination with enabling AOT by default would be agreeable to St= eve and as such perhaps an answer to the decision whether to enable AOT by = default.

 

= As such, simply _assuming_ that Steve knew of transformations would = be wrong, so I had to mention the option of transformations.

 

I did not simply claim = that Steve is less knowledgable than me, at most it could be said that I (i= mplicitly) claimed that Steve is less knowledged than me on the relation be= tween transformations and Clojure AOT problems, but even then, I included a= qualifier =E2=80=9CIt appears that=E2=80=9D, not =E2=80=9CIt is the case t= hat=E2=80=9D.

 

The beginning =E2=80=9CIt appears you are unfamiliar with [...]=E2=80= =9D is simply a perfectly cromulent beginning of a sentence, not some asser= tion of superiority.

 

>For instance concerning the topic at hand, knowi= ng that users may transform

packages as they wish t= o me seems to be independent of which default choice

we should make for the distribution.

 <= /o:p>

It is not independent, see my previous e-mail= where I explained how the existence of transformations turns some problems= mentioned w.r.t. enabling AOT into non-problems.

 

If you have a disagreem= ent with that explanation, please actually say what the disagreement is ins= tead of only saying that you disagree. The former might bring us closer to = some collective decision on what the proper default behaviour is for Guix, = the latter doesn=E2=80=99t, is almost useless and makes it look like you di= dn=E2=80=99t bother to read the =E2=80=98(...)=E2=80=99 part.

 

While I sup= pose it is technically possible you have read the part =E2=80=98(...)=E2=80= =99, given your response I simply don=E2=80=99t believe you did and hence I= consider it fair to conclude that you are not familiar with the contents o= f the (...) part.

 

Best regards,

Maxime Devos

= --_937D9825-63DB-4494-B770-2A69325D915F_--